Letters for July 1, 2004
Sensitive to disease
Re “It hurts everywhere” (RN&R, Arts & Culture, June 17):
I would like to thank you for the excellent article “It hurts everywhere.” I would like to thank author Wishelle Banks for including me in her article. There is one note of clarification I would like to make. Sleep apnea is not a symptom of fibromyalgia. I had surgery to correct my sleep apnea, and the surgery may have been the trauma that triggered my fibromyalgia. I guess it was a trade off, one sleep disorder for another.
On to other matters: My wife scolded me for the offhand remark about “the chicks’ disease” and said I wasn’t being sensitive. I thought I was being in touch with my feminine side. Heck, I thought being in touch and sensitive was how I caught this thing in the first place. I also noticed the other two interviewees were teachers. If I were them, I would have blamed the children; you know how rotten kids can be. I know my wife will probably get on me for picking on the little buggers.
That’s a good thing, right?
Re “Watching the inspector” (RN&R, Cover story, June 17):
I managed to plow through portions of your rest-u-rant article; it was very POV [point of view].
I took and passed the Washoe County inspector exam (job title “environmentalist"). To inspect restaurants, a little biology education helps, yet this necessary and demanding task is really OJT [on-the-job training] experience, I’m sure.
In Sacramento and San Francisco, public information on restaurant scores has been controversial, while here in Reno, one can check up on any hygienic shortcomings in the local paper; often it appears these are caused by cultural and/or inexperienced behaviors.
It is relevant to note that currently a sausage factory owner is on trial in Oakland for the triple murder of three inspectors. His novel defense is that they “were trying to drive him out of business.”
I have dined at all three Egg Roll King locations for several years, and overall, their food and service is healthy and a good value.
Missed the point
Re “After all, we’re only ordinary ideologues” (RN&R, View from the fray, June 24):
Deidre wrote: “It’s obvious as the long nose on Bush’s face that these depraved evildoers can’t be as committed to their own religion, values and families as we are to ours.”
I’m not sure of her intent, but did she mean bin Laden, al Zawahiri, etc? Committed to their religion and value—probably. Perhaps over-committed, I would say. But how on earth are the 19 hijackers of 9/11, and the legions of attackers who followed, or who intend to follow their example, committed to their families? Saddam and the insurgents are dedicated family men, no doubt; but they come up a little short in the values category. Not that I would care a whit about all of the above if they were suiciding, beheading, hijacking and thinking of nuking on another planet, but they just happen to be here on Earth.
If I misinterpret her intent here, I apologize; but it appears that she would sanction the obliteration of my family and others based upon said commitment, regardless of how much they cause wild blowouts on my nutcasemeter.